Another thread which talked about specific speaker brands was taken over, so I’d like to start a new one.
Mind you, I do not believe in a "best" type of tweeter, nor do I believe in a best brand of speaker, so lets keep that type of conversation out, and use this instead to focus on learning about choices speaker designers make and what that may mean to the end user.
There is no such thing as a speaker driver without trade offs. Some choices must be forsworn in exchange for another.
In the end, the materials used, magnet and motor structure, and crossover choices as well as the listening room come together to make a great speaker, of which there are many. In addition, we all listen for different things. Imaging, sweetness, warmth, detail, dance-ability and even efficiency so there is no single way to measure a driver and rate it against all others.
Also, please keep ads for your 4th dimensional sound or whatever off this thread. Thanks.
My point, poorly made, was that the quality of the tweeter was pretty subjective, and I had not heard one that was so fantastic it would eliminate any other tweeter from consideration.
I consider the plasma tweeter revolutionary in terms of technology, not sound I'm afraid.
@erik_squires Hi Erik, I have never heard the Lansche plasma’s so this comment isn’t directly for that speaker, but why couldn’t it be the worlds best tweeter, May not be at all, but something is. You speak of measurements specifically frequency response. As you know it is completely possible for a tubed amp and a solid state amp to have identical fr, yet, we all know that they will not sound the same. I say all of this because I remember Mr. Hill dragging in his plasma tanks and Hill Plasmatronics to Marcof/SpeakerCraft. That tweeter was fast, airy, yet rich, detailed yet smooth. For me, it was the best tweeter that I have ever heard.... Although the rest of the speaker certainly was not.
I don’t know what technology Lansche speakers use, but I’d love to hear a pair.
But I wouldn't call the FR best in the world, and, oddly, there's some stored energy ringing happening near 20kHz. Maybe this is from the horn?
Again, buy what you like, but I think that calling these the best in the world tweeters is a bit much. I think there are a number of dome's, ribbons and AMTs which would sound as good if not better to some.
Probably true for a 3 way, but in a 2 way with a larger woofer if you cross a large woofer over too high, it will start beaming. If you want a more full sounding 2 way with a bigger woofer and not trade off imaging and soundstage (with a 2-way, this tradeoff basically exists with anything bigger than a 5"), you will want a highly capable tweeter that you can cross over lower.
If a designer can do so with the driver on hand, they will. Look at the Revel M106 and Revel M126BE, designed by the same team. When they got their hands on a beryllium tweeter, what did they do? Drop the crossover frequency by 600 Hz in order to achieve much, much better dispersion characteristics. Of course to do so you need a much better tweeter with bigger magnets, stronger voice coils, and exotic diaphragms.
Isn’t it best for a speaker designer to let the midrange play as high as it can play correctly , then cross over the tweeter higher so it can handle more power and can be of smaller diameter to better disperse. Thinking natural rolloff of the midrange...presence region of 2 kz to 4 kz with low order or without crossover.
Maybe some well known tweeters are crossed to low...Maybe this is what makes them calling attention to themselves...sounds kind of ´´squawking’´ phenomenon around 2kz.
I agree plasma tweeters are hard to beat. But short a driver that needs piping in large tanks of gas, the Seas diamond tweeter is easily the best I’ve ever heard. IMO it’s better than the Paradigm or Revel Be tweeter or the Raidho or RAAL ribbon tweeters in terms of micro detail, dispersion, and midrange dynamics, I’ve never heard a tweeter that could dynamically play so damn low (pretty flat down to 500Hz or so).
I use much smaller AMT’s than that one, but yeah, they are still much larger than a dome.
Yes, having a low crossover point is great, but you can find that in a number of good tweets for a lot less. Maybe down to 1.8 kHz though.
It is a nice driver though, don’t get me wrong, but the relative value is a bit of a head scratcher. :) However, perhaps they are like SB Acoustics. The wholesale could be MUCH less than that, less than half. Then it becomes much more interesting. :)
Hi Erik, I have a pair of the Original Big Ess folded horns at home also and agree, its a nice animal, but much larger than a dome. What sets this tweeter apart is its size and what it does. It has about a real world sensitivity of about 93 @ 8 ohms. It has a Xmas of over 3mm! Linear 1 way travel is 1.5mm. If you use their spec of 2.83v input and an average sensitivity of 95, it is plus or minus about 1 db for its operating range. With this Xmax, it can be crossed very low, they have tested it at 1.3k. This construction should have very low distortion. This tweeter should be able to compare with just about any dome out there.... And YES EXPENSIVE. But, you should be able to come up with some world class MTM’s in to 90 to 95db sensitivity.
On the other hand, with that output level it would go well in high end professional monitors mated with low compression /low distortion mids and woofers.
Shame the reviewers did not compare frequency compression
A friend sent me this to take a look at several months ago. On Paper, it is one of the best tweeters that I have seen. It appears to come from one of Morel/Accuton designers. Has anyone tried or even heard this? They are fairly expensive. I'd love some info on real life experience.
When we start getting above 10khz, we all hear differently...some not at all or very rolled off. I think that this absolutely impacts our choice of tweeter or design. Be tweeters sound harsh to me and this could be do to some hearing loss.
The plasma tweeter has some really interesting characteristics. I've heard it. Meh.
I'd be happier with a top of the line AMT or Be from a number of vendors. This was at an audio show in a cramped room though, so it's quite likely I never heard it to full potential.
There is no diaphragm mass, it’s the ionized air around the Plasma flame that makes the sound. And once you’ve heard it, it will stay with you forever as a wow!!! moment. The highs are so pristine and crystalline they seem to dance across the sound-stage in front of you. I use them from 10kHz up on my ESL’s https://i.ebayimg.com/images/g/V5sAAOSwCJxZ6PXy/s-l1600.jpg
Having built esl's, magnetic planars, ribbons, and owned a variety of domes soft and hard types. I found a reason to like each. Cant say I spent much time with horns or amt's, or exotic drivers such as plasma or bending wave drivers., though I am impressed with MBL's tweeter. My consistent favorite has been a line source dipole ribbon. The dipole nature of the driver just sounds right to me. The large presentation and effortless way it portrays music is a big plus in my book. If I were not a hopelessly addicted speaker builder and was looking for musical satisfaction, I could live with a good pair of ESL's. But the hot rod in me wants to stretch the legs of the speaker every once in awhile and this is where an esl's shows their limits. That being said, the heart of the music resides in the mids, there are single driver speakers out there that can do the job too. Ignore the frequency plots that roll off quickly on both ends of the spectrum. If it gets the mids right you will know it and not care for the other shortcomings. Greg GT Audio Works
Kind of a related topic, that is using an "array" of tweeters, and midrange drivers as well, what some call a "line source", stacking the drivers vertically in the enclosure.
My brain tells me such a design would not have very good sound stage, that the "localization" of individual performers in the recording would be "all over the place", but the few times I've auditioned speakers like that, they generally have excellent sound stage.
It would seem to me to be a really expensive way to build a speaker. With multiple drivers, would that offer the designer the option of using much cheaper drivers?
I'm a horn guy well - for the entire frequency spectrum, that is (currently contemplating a tapped horn subwoofer to augment my main all-horn speakers, that would replace my well-integrated SVS SB16-Ultra) - and prefer horn-loaded compression drivers for tweeter duties. S.P. Tech's waveguide-loaded dome tweeters also sound very good (at one point I owned S.P. Tech's Timepiece model).
I guess the sonic takeaway from this has to do with how the dome/diaphragm couples with the air "gradually" via the acoustic impedance transformer (the horn or waveguide), how the driver is effectively "relieved" through the horn/waveguide and hereby sporting much higher sensitivity to make for better headroom, dispersion characteristics that involves less early reflections, and not least that a bigger air radiation area is set in motion - one that far exceeds that of the dome/diaphragm itself.
The cumulative outcome of this and how it's perceived sonically, to my ears, is a more relaxed/effortless, potentially more ingrained (with the midrange), and a more substance-filled, energized or "ignited" sound. It doesn't sound like a tweeter per se in the typical sense (and I believe there is one, a "typical sense"), and that's the whole point; focusing on high frequencies has a tendency of wanting them to "sound like something," almost like a distinct entity, but it comes at the cost coherency and of live, acoustic sound - again, to my ears. I once owned a pair of Raidho Ayra C1.1 speakers, and they sported the perhaps most enjoyable, delicate and intricate sound of the upper frequency span of any speaker I've owned, and as such I couldn't fault them. Ultimately though I found they lacked a real-ness here, which wasn't exclusive to the high frequencies.
I find it largely fruitless to be brand-specific with tweeters. What matters is the principle and implementation.
The ribbon tweeter festooned speakers didn't work out, but the little single ended amp did. Now I have horn loaded tweeters in Klipsch Heresy IIIs that sound amazingly uncolored and sweet, and image like crazy. Great speakers.
I was under the impression that the Pass article was specifically regarding full range single drivers being driven by a solid state voltage source amplifier with a very high damping factor. The so-called resistor trick mimics a lower damping factor which in many cases makes the speaker “think” it’s being driven by a current source. I’m sure there’s a much better technical explanation but this was my takeaway when I read his article several months ago.
Owned many brands of speakers with most of the tweeter types mentioned. I’ll take a metal dome please. The crossover has just as much to do with the sound however. Diamond is also very good. Most of the other types just can’t get the top end right.
There is no universal approach to each client. The flexibility of marketing defines success of business in general. It is impossible to stop at nothing. It is necessary to define need of the potential buyer and to give him necessary. Only thus long-term cooperation is formed.
The article I know of from Pass was about using current sources + EQ circuits for certain types of woofers, in which he felt you would get a better response.
As far as I know, Pass has never attempted to sell all speakers as benefiting from this approach.
I stumbled onto this thread and wanted to add my 2c.
I'm a horn guy, for mid/hi at least. I recently tried the new-kid-on-the-block ring radiator compression drivers (Eminence) since I'd always wanted to try a ring since seeing photos of the 075 looong ago. I put them on small screw-on CD horns I was using already, replacing a good standard-design compression driver. The results were very good. I won't go back.
As mentioned earlier in the thread, though, they can be overbearing. I used a Nelson Pass 'trick' I already employed on my prior drivers in which it was suggested that a certain resistive load in series with the driver, when using an amp that behaves nominally like a voltage source, will simulate the behavior of a current source. I made no attempt to perfectly match anything; I simply used a noninductive 8 ohm power resistor. As with my prior drivers, the 'edge' was taken off. It's not the slight amplitude reduction nor is it anything I see on a scope (either from the amp or from a microphone), and I don't care whether the amp acts as a voltage source or a current source, but the effect is very pleasing, and the new tweeter sounds better than anything I've used prior. It runs from 2400hz on. The crossover is active digital, a 90db/oct FIR filter, just to fill in the details.
I am sorry if this is coming off as heavy handed. I have seen a number of good threads devolve into "my brand X is much better than your brand Y" or "you aren't getting 4D sound..."
So long as we can avoid that, all participation is welcome, especially from those with first hand experience, including and of course, especially @prof
I would like us to bend towards manufacturing choices and what kinds of pro's cons each has.
For instance, MBL's are pretty expensive, and seem to need lots of room. Just saying. :)
ATC have built their own tweeter in the last five years. Previously they used Excel and before that Vifa and before that Audax (40+ years of pro audio)
It took many years years to develop and they regard Excel tweeters as extremely good - so improving upon that was difficult.
The ATC dome tweeter looks much like any fabric dome tweeter however it has NO Ferrofluid and had to be made with extremely tight tolerances in order to dissipate heat (large ATC are intended to play at realistic levels of real instruments like a drum set). A dual spider was necessary to avoid rocking motion which is a challenge in all dome tweeters due to their small size and why the majority use Ferrofluid.
Ferrofluid is not bad but it does dry out with time and changes the response and eventual reliability.
ATC like doped fabric domes and pulp paper or constrained layer damping type approaches to cones or domes. This is because these materials are intrinsically damped and therefore do not "ring" or affect the timbre of the sound reproduced as much as rigid materials. (Of course break up can be issue with softer materials and therefore expensive motors and large voice coils are needed which makes the transducer units overall extremely costly)
I am not sure if it will ever be made available to the general market and other speaker manufacturers like other ATC drivers.
While I’ve participated here a bit, I felt pressured to choose my topics and my wording carefully. My impression is that the majority of what I could theoretically contribute on the subject of tweeters and their implementation would be unwelcome. Not that that’s necessarily any big loss to anyone...
My point being, your "guiding principles" may be stifling participation more than you realize.
@prof Maybe I missed it, but in your original posting there was nothing about the technology. I only saw subjective opinions.
Also, no reason why you can’t mention it in comparison, in fact I would like you to. :) Let’s talk materials, operating principles. How does the motor work? How does it measure? What about room tuning and placement?
Of course, it is also impossible to take a tweeter out of the context of an entire speaker. However, I really want us to discuss trade-offs, benefits, costs of the technology.
"Brand X makes the most realistic speakers I’ve ever heard" doesn’t enable that type of discussion, and there are plenty of those threads around.
Look forward to talking about how the MBL drivers work, and even how the tweet is different from their woofers, etc.
I agree, it's impossible not to discuss brands entirely, especially when a technology is entirely proprietary like MBL seems to.
I would like to focus on the technology and trade-offs. The post by @prof reads identical to an MBL speaker review. I'm sure it is well intentioned, but I'd like to discourage them in this thread, other threads may of course be started by anyone.
As mentioned, here are my guiding principles:
Stay focused on tweeters and their manufacturers (when known)
Discuss the technology, materials, construction, and trade-offs
Discuss comparisons to other similar and dissimilar tweeters
We will sometimes have to mention specific speaker brands, it is inevitable, but if we make speaker reviews common in this thread it destroys its focus. I really want to avoid this thread becoming "Speakers with good tweeters"
Ultimately of course, this is a group effort, so the contributions are what make a good thread, I just hope we maintain the purpose and add in the spirit of discussing technology and value.
I’m about to take delivery of a pair of speakers that use ribbon tweeters…a first for me…and I hope they sound as good as the aluminum/magnesium tweeters in my current "I won’t mention the brand as to not anger the OP" speakers designed by Alan Yun. I’m trying these new speakers due to their substantial efficiency with the plan of scoring a single ended low wattage tube amp at some point simply to see what all THAT fuss is about…I'm currently in Push Pull tube land for my main listening rig. I have noticed with my current speakers that although they utilize aluminum/magnesium for both the tweeters and woofers, they’ve been voiced to simply sound somewhat neutral and certainly not "forward" like one might assume metal drivers would sound…nothing hot or metallic in these, and I am certain that the crossover and voicing choices made by competent designers is the thing that matters here, not driver material.
I have to echo Duke’s response. I get why you don’t want to mention brands, but it seems to really limit the applicability of the discussion. MBL makes a very specific type of tweeter as far as I know not found elsewhere, and I have no idea if other manufacturers have produced an omni tweeter design with similarly excellent results. So I can’t say "I like omni tweeters because they have X results" because maybe I don’t like all omni tweeters - I can only speak to the specific ones I’ve heard that sound great. And pointing the the specific brand allows others to know exactly what I’m talking about.
And this really speaks to the whole issue of discussing tweeters in the absence of specific designs and implementations: We all know drivers don’t have qualities that exist in a vacuum - it depends on implementation. I’ve heard ribbon tweeters sound awful, and sound great, depending on how, technically, a specific speaker designer is using it.
How do I discuss the qualities of metal dome tweeters without mentioning the differences in implementation? Way back when metal dome tweeters were becoming more in use I used to agree with many audiophiles that metal dome tweeters sounded hot and metallic. But that prejudice was vanquished when I encountered the way Paul Hales had employed them in his speakers (Transcendence line), which seemed to have all the benefits of the metal drivers without the purported draw backs and characteristics (they were remarkably smooth, rich, sweet sounding speakers - still are, as I still have some). Now, if someone cares to, they can look into how Hales implemented those tweeters (looking for instance at stereophile's measurements, etc).
Eric, I understand your desire to focus on tweeters and not speaker brands, but realistically how is prof supposed to talk about omnidirectional tweeters and not mention MBL? Frankly I cannot think of any omnidirectional or quasi-omnidirectional tweeters that are not brand-specific.
While obviously not using the same tweeter technology as MBL, imo there are other speakers that accomplish some of the same things through what might be called a poly-directional configuration, with the actual tweeters being fairly conventional. But this would be getting into implementation, and implementation is brand-specific...
I’m glad you found a commercial speaker brand you like, but I need this thread to avoid devolving into brand flame wars. To avoid this in the future please:
Stay focused on tweeters and their manufacturers (when known)
Discuss the technology, materials, construction, and trade-offs
Discuss comparisons to other similar and dissimilar tweeters
I really wanted to focus this thread on the tweeter drivers, their
technology and trade offs. I really wanted to avoid discussing specific
consumer speaker brands. I certainly did not mean to start a discussion
about entire commercial speaker from top to bottom.
It would be interesting to know if anyone else has heard an omni tweeter they felt delivered outstanding dynamics and realism.
The following isn’t a claim about some objective technical truth; it’s only my subjective assessment:
The best tweeter I’ve ever experienced (or my favorite) is the MBL (omni) tweeters. I remember the first time I encountered the MBL at a CES show many years ago. For every speaker that touted it’s exotic or expensive tweeter, I often ended up hearing the tweeter "look at me!" Ribbons, domes hard and soft, whatever, some gained clarity and air and verisimilitude over others, but especially with drum cymbal there was always a sense of those sounds being reproduced by a tweeter.
One of the constant disappointments in hi fi reproduction of upper
frequencies is how small and thin high frequency instruments become
relative to real life - no matter how vivid they are through the
system. You just have to tap a drum stick against a ride cymbal to see
just how BIG and round that sound is, compared to the squeezed down
version that comes out of most hi-fi rigs.
Then I entered the MBL room and literally for the first time ever I heard drum cymbals sounding like they did in real life - big, rich, round, clean, timbrally bang on...it just didn’t sound like tweeters or mechanical reproduction, it just sounded like drum cymbals. To my ears it put every other speaker’s attempts at natural high frequencies to shame. (I know Jonathan Valin of TAS has made similar comments). This impression of the MBL upper frequencies has remained fairly constant over the years. And now having owned the smaller MBL 121 stand mounted speakers, with their omni mids and tweeters, the impression remains. I’ve never heard life like detail reproduced more effortlessly and naturally. (I also own other speakers, e.g Thiel 3.7s, Waveform, Hales, and have had many other speakers and none I’ve heard at my place, stores or shows do it better. That said, I heard a demo of the Raidho small monitors that with vocals was mindblowing, and which suggested the MBLs were coming in for some competition in the high frequencies).
Tweeter Mythology isn't unlike Speaker Cone Material Mythology as "doped paper" seems kind of dopey, "nanotube sandwich" sounds kind of foody, and a good designer can make music happen with either. It's still kind of interesting that piles of all sorts of mids and woofers always combine with (generally) one good tweeter, so I do agree with the fact that the mid/woof generators are of primary import. I think there needs to be more research into using actual bird parts for tweeters…I think there's a lot to learn from natural beaks perhaps being grown in labs to save the actual birds, plus there are few tweeters made using feather damping.
Not saying tweeters aren't important, but their price and attention can be oversized to the rest of the speaker. :)
I have AMT's and ring radiators with solid center poles, and no friends, so I'm safe. :)
There are two Be tweeters I'm dying to try. The SB Acoustics which was recently released and the really low profile Be from ScanSpeak, especially as it may work in Focal's as a retro-grade.
But, neither time, money or energy are alignining right now.
If you look up Piezo tweeters (there seems to be about a zillion pages of stuff about 'em) you'll notice that the "crystal" (or something) allows them to be used without crossovers…and these tweeters can cost less than 3 bucks. Amazing. Another note, tweeters allow aural "cues" that make recorded music sound real and lead your ear balls in the right direct, thus making them extremely important to audio reproduction. They also have the benefit of allowing a dinner party guest to stick their pesky fingers right into the beryllium domes of your Magicos, causing you to look around for a Tweeter Insurance Policy as well as revising your list of Friends You Invite Over.
Getting back to tweeters, I don't have a lot of experience with a lot of different current-generation domes and ribbon(-ish) drivers, but I've tried a fair number of different compression drivers and many different diaphragm types. My preferences tend to be for polymer diaphragms (rather than metal diaphragms) up until you get to the price point where true beryllium diaphragms enter the game. Since my design choices place a higher priority on the horn or waveguide than on the compression driver, and a higher priority on synergy than on excellence in isolation, matching up the exit angle of the compression driver with the entry angle at the throat of the horn or waveguide is a consideration, which does limit my compression driver choices somewhat.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
